ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
This article by Leo Lewis suggests that robots are not being introduced in China as fast as some have suggested as human labour is still cheaper:http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/columnists/chinainnumbers/article4242419.eceI imagine you can access the whole article, YMS, but even the bit everyone can see suggests what it is going to say.
You never give up, do you!I'm not going to argue with you because every time anybody does you end up insulting them. But I will point out some factual errors.First, the German Ideology was written jointly by Marx and Engels. In fact the passage you quote was literally written by Engels. Chris Arthur in his edition of the work published by Lawrence & Wishart in 1970 explains:
Quote:The extant manuscript of the first chapter "Feuerbach" consists of pages halved into two columns, the left filled with most of the text in Engels' script — he wrote more smoothly and quickly than Marx — from joint dictation. The right-hand column has many additions from both authors.So give Engels a break!Second, Engels, in his [1859] review of Marx's A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, uses the phrase "the materialist conception of history". He was not speaking there about a "materialist conception" of the physical world.Third, Marx had no objection to the well-known summary of his views in the Preface to that work being called "materialist".
LBird wrote:It’s my thesis that any reference to ‘material’ or ‘materialism’ should be replaced with ‘production’ or ‘productionism’. If one has to retain ‘material’ (for ideological or historical reasons), then it should be prefixed with ‘ideal’, so that the reference should be read, not as ‘material’ or ‘materialism’, but as ‘ideal-material’ or ‘idealism-materialism’.It’s clear that when Marx uses the term ‘material’, he is referring to ‘human production’, not ‘material things’. And as ‘human production’ contains both ‘ideas’ and their practice upon the ‘material’ world, then ‘production’ means both ‘ideas’ and ‘material’, and not simply ‘material’.The distinction you are trying to draw is (I think) between philosophical materialism (as a theory of the nature of "reality") and materialist conception of history (as a theory of history and society).There's no need to invent a new term for the latter as "historical materialism" fits the bill exactly.Having said this I think Marx will have been some kind of philosophical materialist too (how could he have been anything else?), even though he didn't write about this as much as Engels.
Untruncated and unsentimental lyrics here:http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/e/eric_bogle/no_mans_land_lyrics.html
The Courtesans programme:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B16zO24IUAI1PRm.jpg:largeNot much we'd disagree with, is there?
Class War's contribution to the campaign:Amusing (sort of) and what is expected of Class War but wrong from a theoretical point of view. Our problems are not caused by rule by toffs so it wouldn't make any difference if the rulers all rose from the ranks. They could/would be just as bad if not worse (think Captain Bligh) as it's the system not those who run it that's to blame.
Actually, I think his "spirituality" is rather more than that. He believes in "God". As a recovering addict he has been taught to imagine a "higher power" looking down on him and watching what he does. Presumably he feels the need to believe in that to stop him becoming an addict again. But he's not a christian but as far as I can work out some sort of New Age pantheist (we're all part of God).That doesn't necessarily detract from his political views, much of which is not all that different from ours as you point out.
Shocking news item in today's i paper:
Quote:Stone 'diminishes' anti-war songThe composer of the anti-war anthem "No Man's Land" (also known as "Green Fields of France") has criticised the pop-soul singer Joss Stone for recording a "sentimentalised" version of his song, which omits key verses about the horrors of war, as part of the Poppy Appeal.Stone teamed up with the guitarist Jeff Beck to record a version of the song, a reflection on the grave of a young man, Willie McBride, killed in the First World War, which was written by Eric Bogle. Chosen official single for the Royal British Legion Poppy Appeal, Stone will perform her version in front of the Queen on Remembrance Sunday.But Stone's version, sung to a gospel choice backing, removes the final two verses, which deliver a withering condemnation of the futility of war.The missing lines refer to "man's blind indifference to his fellow man. And a whole generation who were butchered and damned" and "the suffering, the sorrow, the glory, the shame. The killing, the dying, it was all done in vain".This is worse than the nationalists hi-jacking "Jerusalem". It was a song that Islington branch members, when they met in the Queen Victoria pub in Holloway Road in the 1980s on a Saturday night, always used to request the band to play. (Despite its name the Queen Vic was an Irish pub where they sold An Poblacht and they always played "A Nation Once Again" at the end, but we didn't stand up).Alan, you're in Thailand or somewhere, but if you were back here you wouldn't believe what Poppy Day has become: a commercial as well as a nationalist feast-day. The shops are selling crimson cards and crosses. It's just like Easter, Mothers Day, etc. In fact, worse because it's putting over an onboxious message.
More on this sort of thing from this week's Economist:http://www.economist.com/news/business/21631055-intelligence-agencies-and-tech-firms-have-little-choice-compromise-crypto-wars-20Yet another example of how capitalism distorts and hampers the use of modern technology.
Before comrades (and ex-comrades) get enthusiastic about setting up a cafe at 52 Clapham High St, they should consider the fate of the cafe that Lewisham People before Profit set up. Called "Come the Revolution" it closed under acrimonious conditions:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg8Uzwe7_xchttp://crossfields.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/people-before-profit-embarrassment.htmlNo doubt in the future. when it's much bigger, the socialist movement will be able to do this sort of thing and succeed, but now, when we are so small, is not the time. We need to build a bigger socialist movement. Which is why (to return to the subject of this thread) we are leafletting Rochester next Saturday.Incidentally, the PBP candidate there, Nick Long, likes us(even though he doesn't agree with our stategy of advocating socialism and nothing else) and helped distribute our leaflets in a recent local council by-election in Lambeth.
Nick Long explains his position elsewhere:
Quote:Nick LongOctober 28, 2013To argue for the organisation of society on socialist lines needs the organisation and growth of a radical socialist party of the mass of working people. Lets follow the path of a establishing such a party – growing and sinking roots in working class communities, helping develop working class militants, holding work shops and study groups, running advice centres, socials, food banks, supporting workers in struggle, helping sustain local campaigns -this is the path we are following in Lewisham with LPBP. Building a broad inclusive party of all those opposing austerity and willing to campaign against it. The SP platform is no different from the founding principles of the SP or SWP and will not attract all those coming into struggle."People before Profit" is not a good slogan. It implies the continued existence of the profit system and that it is possible to get it to put meeting people's needs before profit-making. The occasional victory can be won but the system always wins the war.The proper socialist slogan of course is People NOT Profits
Yes, I always thought that it was a pity that the Cuban exiles didn't succeed in blowing up that monstruous bust of Marx that the authorities let the Russian state capitalist regime set up. In fact I wonder if they allowed it to be set up to discredit Marx and his ideas by associating them with the Russian regime and its oppression and exploitation of workers. It can be one of the many statues to come down when socialism is established.
These are only policewiomen not combat troops. As the person you are quoting from is ex-ICC he seems to have kept their view that there is no difference between political democracy and fascism. Obviously there is, and we've always taken the position that political democracy is a gain for the working class but that supporting a capitalist state in a war is not a legitimate way of defending it.People like him are saying that there is no difference between the very limited political democracy that exists in parts of the Middle East and an ISIS-type Islamic State. There clearly is. In fact ISIS is worse than the pre-war fascist regimes, both in ideology and practice. And we shouldn't be afraid to say so.
Why does he put "Islamist barbarians" in inverted commas? Doesn't he think that's what they are? I'd also like to see his evidence that these barbarians do have women combat troops.
This article by friend Stuart (when he was a socialist) discusses one theory as to why workers put up with capitalism that has not been mentioned in the discussion so far: "dull compulsion"http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2011/no-1280-april-2011/brief-history-public-relationsThe original article by Conrad Lodziak in Radical Philosophy in 1988, on which it is partly based, is also relevant (though it doesn't seem to be easily available on the internet or interweb as YMS calls it).Here's the conclusion (of Stuart's article):
Quote:We in the Socialist Party are often accused by our opponents, and even sometimes by our supporters, of not having made any progress in our 100-year history. What the foregoing arguments should have made clear is that it is not within our power to make the kind of progress demanded of us. The working class generally is ideologically indifferent, and accepts capitalism because it must. The only thing that can disrupt this to the advantage of socialists is, says Lodziak, ‘effective oppositional practices inscribed with oppositional viewpoints’ – in other words, the development of the class struggle. We can contribute to the development of this struggle, and we do, but it is not within the power of a small party such as ours to determine its course. The failure of sufficiently large and powerful oppositions to arise is down not to a lack of energy or dedication on the part of socialists, nor the absence of a sufficiently clever socialist advertising campaign, but to the power of economic necessity and state coercion.Article from our archives on the Hammersmith Socialist Society here:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2003/no-1190-october-2003/william-morris-and-hammersmith-socialist-societyAnyway the Socialist League and its paper Commonweal continued under anarchist control for a few years afterwards.
